Abstract
For effective implantation of carmustine (BCNU) wafers, it is important to determine the order of priority with reference to the intraoperative frozen section diagnosis of the resection margin (IOFM). The accuracy of IOFM and patterns of tumor recurrence with implantation of BCNU wafers were studied retrospectively. Forty-six cases of newly diagnosed malignant glioma were evaluated. Tumors were resected after intraoperative frozen section diagnosis (IOFD). IOFM was performed for resection walls and evaluated on a three-level scale (−, no tumor invasion; 1+, minor cell invasion; 2+, evident cell invasion). The results were used for effective BCNU wafer implantation. The IOFM sections were then thawed, frozen-paraffin marginal (FPM) sections were prepared, and IOFM was evaluated with FPM sections. The accuracy of IOFD grading was compared to that of the formalin fixed paraffin-embedded section and was 76.1%. The accuracy of IOFM was compared with the FPM section in 148 specimens from 42 patients. The IOFM accuracy was 80.4%. BCNU wafers were implanted in 25 patients and there was recurrence in 15. Local recurrence was seen in 40% (6 patients). However, there was no recurrence immediately below the BCNU wafers. With properly performed IOFM, BCNU wafers can be efficiently implanted, and local recurrence immediately below the BCNU wafers can be inhibited.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- BCNU:
-
Bis-chloroethylnitrosourea
- IOFD:
-
Intraoperative frozen section diagnosis
- IOFM:
-
Intraoperative frozen section diagnosis of the resection margin
- IDH:
-
Isocitrate dehydrogenase
- 5-ALA:
-
5-Aminolevulinic acid
- TMZ:
-
Temozolomide
- IFN-β:
-
Interferon-β
- BEV:
-
Bevacizumab
- FPM section:
-
Frozen-paraffin marginal section
- FFPE section:
-
Formalin fixed paraffin-embedded section
References
Westphal M, Hilt DC, Bortey E et al (2003) A phase 3 trial of local chemotherapy with biodegradable carmustine (BCNU) wafers (Gliadel wafers) in patients with primary malignant glioma. Neuro Oncol 5(2):79–88
Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G et al (2016) The 2016 world health organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 131(6):803–820
Burger PC, Heinz ER, Shibata T, Kleihues P (1988) Topographic anatomy and CT correlations in the untreated glioblastoma multiforme. J Neurosurg 68(5):698–704
Wilson CB (1992) Glioblastoma: the past, the present, and the future. Clin Neurosurg 38:32–48
Asano K, Duntsch CD, Zhou Q et al (2004) Correlation of N-cadherin expression in high grade gliomas with tissue invasion. J Neurooncol 70(1):3–15
Keles GE, Anderson B, Berger MS (1999) The effect of extent of resection on time to tumor progression and survival in patients with glioblastoma multiforme of the cerebral hemisphere. Surg Neurol 52(4):371–379
Lacroix M, Abi-Said D, Fourney DR et al (2001) A multivariate analysis of 416 patients with glioblastoma multiforme: prognosis, extent of resection, and survival. J Neurosurg 95(2):190–198
De Bonis P, Anile C, Pompucci A et al (2013) The influence of surgery on recurrence pattern of glioblastoma. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 115(1):37–43
Shimizu H, Mori O, Ohaki Y et al (2005) Cytological interface of diffusely infiltrating astrocytoma and its marginal tissue. Brain Tumor Pathol 22(2):59–74
Chand P, Amit S, Gupta R, Agarwal A (2016) Errors, limitations, and pitfalls in the diagnosis of central and peripheral nervous system lesions in intraoperative cytology and frozen sections. J Cytol 33(2):93–97
Ishikawa E, Yamamoto T, Satomi K et al (2014) Intraoperative pathological diagnosis in 205 glioma patients in the pre-BCNU wafer era: retrospective analysis with intraoperative implantation of BCNU wafers in mind. Brain Tumor Pathol 31(3):156–161
Uematsu Y, Owai Y, Okita R, Tanaka Y, Itakura T (2007) The usefulness and problem of intraoperative rapid diagnosis in surgical neuropathology. Brain Tumor Pathol 24(2):47–52
Plesec TP, Prayson RA (2007) Frozen section discrepancy in the evaluation of central nervous system tumors. Arch Pathol Lab Med 131(10):1532–1540
Barreto SG, Pandanaboyana S, Ironside N, Windsor JA (2017) Does revision of resection margins based on frozen section improve overall survival following pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma? A meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford) 19(7):573–579
Gillitzer R, Thüroff C, Fandel T et al (2011) Intraoperative peripheral frozen sections do not significantly affect prognosis after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. BJU Int 107(5):755–759
Nunez AL, Giannico GA, Mukhtar F et al (2016) Frozen section evaluation of margins in radical prostatectomy specimens: a contemporary study and literature review. Ann Diagn Pathol 24:11–18
Mair M, Nair D, Nair S et al (2017) Intraoperative gross examination vs frozen section for achievement of adequate margin in oral cancer surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 123(5):544–549
Szewczyk M, Golusinski W, Pazdrowski J et al (2017) Positive fresh frozen section margins as an adverse independent prognostic factor for local recurrence in oral cancer patients. Laryngoscope. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.26890 (Epub ahead of print)
Klimberg VS, Harms S, Korourian S (1999) Assessing margin status. Surg Oncol 8(2):77–84
Fukamachi K, Ishida T, Usami S (2010) Total-circumference intraoperative frozen section analysis reduces margin-positive rate in breast-conservation surgery. Jpn J Clin Oncol 40(6):513–520
Ko S, Chun YK, Kang SS, Hur MH (2017) The usefulness of intraoperative circumferential frozen-section analysis of lumpectomy margins in breast-conserving surgery. J Breast Cancer 20(2):176–182
Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ et al (2005) Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 352(10):987–996
Gutenberg A, Lumenta CB, Braunsdorf WE (2013) The combination of carmustine wafers and temozolomide for the treatment of malignant gliomas. A comprehensive review of the rationale and clinical experience. J Neurooncol 113(2):163–174
Chowdhary SA, Ryken T, Newton HB (2015) Survival outcomes and safety of carmustine wafers in the treatment of high-grade gliomas: a meta-analysis. J Neurooncol 122(2):367–382
Hochberg FH, Pruitt A (1980) Assumptions in the radiotherapy of glioblastoma. Neurology 30(9):907–911
Wallner KE, Galicich JH, Krol G, Arbit E, Malkin MG (1989) Patterns of failure following treatment for glioblastoma multiforme and anaplastic astrocytoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 16(6):1405–1409
Giese A, Kucinski T, Knopp U (2004) Pattern of recurrence following local chemotherapy with biodegradable carmustine (BCNU) implants in patients with glioblastoma. J Neurooncol 66(3):351–360
Milano MT, Okunieff P, Donatello RS (2010) Patterns and timing of recurrence after temozolomide-based chemoradiation for glioblastoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 78(4):1147–1155
McDonald MW, Shu HK, Curran WJ Jr, Crocker IR (2011) Pattern of failure after limited margin radiotherapy and temozolomide for glioblastoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 79(1):130–136
Petrecca K, Guiot MC, Panet-Raymond V, Souhami L (2013) Failure pattern following complete resection plus radiotherapy and temozolomide is at the resection margin in patients with glioblastoma. J Neurooncol 111(1):19–23
Shields LB, Kadner R, Vitaz TW, Spalding AC (2013) Concurrent bevacizumab and temozolomide alter the patterns of failure in radiation treatment of glioblastoma multiforme. Radiat Oncol:101. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-8-101
Norden AD, Young GS, Setayesh K et al (2008) Bevacizumab for recurrent malignant gliomas: efficacy, toxicity, and patterns of recurrence. Neurology 70(10):779–787
Chamberlain MC (2011) Radiographic patterns of relapse in glioblastoma. J Neurooncol 101(2):319–323
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Asano, K., Kurose, A., Kamataki, A. et al. Importance and accuracy of intraoperative frozen section diagnosis of the resection margin for effective carmustine wafer implantation. Brain Tumor Pathol 35, 131–140 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10014-018-0320-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10014-018-0320-5